FBI Inspects Locked Shasta Ballots as National Media Descends on Redding Election Fight
By Shasta Unfiltered | September 22, 2026
REDDING — What began as a local fight over how Shasta County runs elections has become a national story. In the past week, FBI agents entered a padlocked room at the county elections office on Market Street, inspected boxes holding November 2024 and June 2026 ballots, and left a green evidence lock marked “SECURED.” A federal grand jury had already subpoenaed Registrar of Voters Clint Curtis to produce June primary materials in Sacramento. California officials, county administrators, and election-integrity activists are now telling three different versions of the same events.
The controversy sits at the intersection of Curtis’s claims that some mail ballots did not “look, feel, or smell right,” a voter-approved Measure B now blocked in court, a 22-month clock that has run out on the 2024 ballots, and a county government that has publicly invited investigators to look at Curtis as well as at his allegations.
National outlets including the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, CalMatters (picked up Tuesday by KPBS), KQED, and Jefferson Public Radio have framed Shasta as a test case of local election skepticism colliding with California’s uniform election code. Conservative YouTube commentator Ramin RealTalk has devoted multiple videos to Curtis and the locked ballots, bringing the story to a statewide audience that does not normally follow Shasta County government.
How Shasta got here
Shasta County votes heavily Republican. Donald Trump carried the county by a wide margin in 2024. After years of conflict over Dominion machines and hand-counting, the Board of Supervisors appointed Florida attorney Clint Curtis as registrar in April 2025, instead of longtime assistant Joanna Francescut. Curtis had testified to Congress in the mid-2000s about voting-machine vulnerabilities and later worked with election-integrity figures including Mike Lindell. He had never administered a California election.
Curtis fired Francescut, cut the number of drop boxes, accused predecessors of ballot stuffing (they and county staff called the charge baseless in a county that reliably elects Republicans), and backed Measure B — a charter amendment requiring photo ID, largely ending mail and early voting, mandating hand counts, and creating a separate county voter roll.
On June 2, 2026, voters split the difference. They passed Measure B with about 55–56 percent. They also ousted Curtis. Francescut won the clerk/registrar race with roughly 55–58 percent and takes office in January 2027. Curtis certified the primary on July 2nd. Some MAGA-aligned supervisors lost or were forced into November runoffs.
Two controversial workplace investigations claim Curtis threatened staff and mixed campaign activity with county time. The board later censured him. County leadership now describes his post-election ballot claims as “frivolous” and “unproven” and has asked state and federal agencies to review both the claims and his official conduct. Curtis has countered by threatening to file a lawsuit, claiming the County used the Oppenheimer Group to conduct a biased investigation.
The ballots that “smelled funny”
After certification and censure, Curtis said workers and observers noticed mail ballots that were thicker, differently textured, and at first smelled unusual. He described them as possible counterfeits and wrote federal officials that vote-by-mail ballots may have been inserted to alter results. He padlocked a second-floor storage room holding both the June 2026 primary ballots and the November 2024 general-election ballots, discarded the keys, and posted “KEEP OUT PER ROV CLINT CURTIS” signs. He said access would require a warrant and bolt cutters.
Citizens filed affidavits. FBI agents interviewed some of them in August. Curtis also discussed bringing on former Mesa County, Colorado, clerk Tina Peters as a consultant; she later said she had not accepted a formal job.
County officials note that Curtis himself certified the June results and that no public forensic evidence of counterfeits has been released. Incoming registrar Francescut has said passing a counterfeit through tabulators at scale would be “really hard” and called the public claims “irresponsible leadership.”
For context, California law does not let a registrar sit on results because some ballots look wrong. Elections Code § 15372 requires the elections official to prepare a certified statement of results and submit it to the governing body within 30 days of the election. The same section states that those duties “are ministerial and nondiscretionary.” If the official fails to certify, the Secretary of State must refer the violation to the district attorney or the Attorney General.
For the June 2, 2026 primary, that 30-day clock ran to July 2 — the day Curtis certified. Counties also had to send statewide results to the Secretary of State shortly thereafter; Weber certified the statewide primary on July 10.
Federal subpoena, then the FBI at the door
On September 10, a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of California subpoenaed Curtis to appear in Sacramento on September 24 and produce voted ballots, envelopes, and records from the June 2 primary — potentially tens of thousands of items — for “preservation, inspection, sampling and production.”
Last week agents came to Redding instead. They used bolt cutters to enter the locked room, inspected the boxes, took no ballots, and left the green “SECURED” lock. Secretary of State observers were present. Curtis said he “just showed them what we had” and that agents “looked at them, did their investigation, and went on their merry way.” He later said he was told he no longer had to haul the boxes to Sacramento, though he had not received written cancellation of the subpoena. The U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to confirm or deny any investigation or subpoena.
It remains publicly unclear whether federal authorities are examining Curtis’s counterfeit-ballot theory, his handling of the materials, or both. New state law (SB 73) makes it a crime to remove voted ballots from an elections official’s custody — a response, in part, to Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s earlier ballot seizure.
The 2024 ballots and the shredder
Federal law (52 U.S.C. § 20701) requires officials to keep covered federal-election records for 22 months. California Elections Code § 17301 goes further: after 22 months, if no contest or specified criminal case was started in that window, the official shall destroy or recycle voted ballots and related packages. For the November 5, 2024 election, that clock ended September 5, 2026. Secretary of State charts label destruction of those voted-ballot categories “mandatory” at the end of the period.
The county scheduled shredding for September 30. Southern California activist Arne List, who spent about 10 days in Shasta after Curtis’s 2026 claims and texted Curtis about a preservation petition, sued to stop destruction. Judge Benjamin Hanna denied an emergency restraining order, finding List had not shown standing for immediate relief. The underlying case remains pending. List said he was not trying to relitigate 2024 but to preserve materials for a possible federal inquiry.
An FBI evidence lock on a shared room is not the same as a court order or a formal seizure of the 2024 ballots. Cutting that lock and shredding the contents without federal or court clearance would be a high-risk step. Curtis has said nothing will be shredded “until somebody tells me to do it.”
Measure B is blocked for November
Attorney General Rob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Weber sued in June, arguing Measure B conflicts with state law on mail ballots, voter ID, hand-counting limits, and a uniform statewide registration system. After a venue fight, Judge Hanna issued a preliminary injunction in August. The November 3 midterm will be run under existing California rules: every active registered voter gets a mail ballot. The merits case continues. Supervisors declined to mount a defense; measure proponents are litigating separately.
On September 9th, the UCLA Voting Rights Project, with former Attorney General Xavier Becerra listed as an adviser, asked the Shasta County civil grand jury to start removal proceedings against Curtis under Government Code § 3060. Curtis called it a political hit. Supervisors have noted a new grand jury would take months and that Curtis leaves office in January anyway.
Drop boxes, mail ballots, and the November election
Curtis reduced the number of drop boxes after taking office. Measure B would have gone much further and largely ended mail voting. The court injunction means November 3 will look like a normal California election: mail ballots to every active registered voter.
National coverage and video
CalMatters published a detailed account Tuesday that KPBS and others carried under headlines about the FBI visiting a “MAGA stronghold.” The Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Chronicle have tracked the locked room, the censure, and Measure B for months. Local stations KRCR and Action News Now have provided day-to-day reporting.
Ramin RealTalk, whose California-politics channel has more than 100,000 subscribers, released a 16-minute video on the locked ballots and the federal subpoena:
An earlier sit-down with Curtis:
Local video reports:
Shasta Unfiltered has previously reported FBI interviews with affidavit witnesses and Curtis’s claims that employees bypassed badge access. Those earlier pieces are part of the same paper trail now being cited in Sacramento and Los Angeles.
Where it stands tonight
Curtis remains registrar through the November 3 election and has said that contest will follow standard state procedures — mail ballots, no Measure B ID or hand-count rules. Francescut takes over in January 2027. The 2024 and 2026 ballots remain in the Market Street office behind the FBI lock. No public lab results, no announced charges, and no written cancellation of the grand-jury process have been released.
Three questions will decide the next chapter: whether federal investigators treat the ballots as evidence of fraud, as evidence of mishandling, or as a closed inspection; whether anyone with authority tells the county it may cut the green lock and shred the 2024 boxes; and whether the civil grand jury or the courts act before Curtis’s term ends.
Shasta County asked for federal authorities to look at its elections. It now has one. The ballots are still here. The country is watching.
